Verifying a usage of a transportation resource

ABSTRACT

A method, system and computer program product for verifying a usage of a transportation resource by an object user of the transportation resource is disclosed. A peer group of users that are expected to behave similarly as the object user is established to determine a normal behavior that the object user is supposed to act consistent with. An observed behavior of the object user is compared to the normal behavior to verify a usage of the transportation resource by the object user.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates generally to a usage of a transportation resourceand more particularly to the verification of a usage of a transportationresource.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Transportation resources are limited. As a consequence, accesses to thelimited transportation resources need to be distributed in a rationalmanner. For example, a new trend is emerging in the world as a method toreduce traffic congestion and to assign the cost impact oftransportation resources to those consuming the resources, which isnormally referred as road user charging. Road user charging requiresactive monitoring of vehicles and their use of roads, including, e.g., achargeback for the use of congested segments at peak times. The processmay also provide alternative routes which provide faster service at ahigher cost, or even vary the cost of a road segment, e.g., a tunnel orbridge, to reduce congestion at peak times.

In a recent business model, users of transportation resources must payfor their usage through some means, for example, various fuel taxes. Theamount of fuel tax paid is tied to the amount of fuel purchased withinthe defined geographic area of the government overseeing thetransportation. If a user does not pay the appropriate amount in fueltaxes for its amount of usage of transportation resources in a definedspecific geographic area, additional costs would be collected via othermeans. On the other hand, if a user pays too much in fuel taxes withrespect to the actual usage of the transportation resources, refunds infees would be made to the user.

Within this business model, it is important to prevent fraud or abuse ofa transportation resource distribution/charging system. If a vehiclefraudulently shows lower usage than the actual usage, an undeservedrefund in fees would occur. On the other hand, a situation might be thatan overage in fuel tax payments results in a miss-match of payment andusage. As a consequence, incompliant behaviors in this model, such asfrauds or abuses, will cause compliance costs to rise to offset the lossdue to incompliant behaviors.

Given the emerging nature of this business model, no specific solutionexists in the market today to provide a safeguard required to verify ausage of the transportation resources to prevent potential fraudregarding the charging of transportation resource usage. Based on theabove, there is a need to verify a usage of a transportation resource.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A method, system and computer program product for verifying a usage of atransportation resource by an object user of the transportation resourceis disclosed. A peer group of users that are expected to behavesimilarly as the object user is established to determine a normalbehavior that the object user is supposed to act consistent with. Anobserved behavior of the object user is compared to the normal behaviorto verify a usage of the transportation resource by the object user.

A first aspect of the invention is directed to a method for verifying ausage of a transportation resource by an object user of thetransportation resource, the method comprising steps of: selecting apeer group of users that are expected to have similar behavior as theobject user; identifying a set of behavioral attributes of the peergroup; determining a normal behavior of the peer group regarding theidentified set of behavioral attributes; and comparing a behavior of theobject user to the normal behavior regarding the identified set ofbehavior attributes to verify the usage of the object user.

A second aspect of the invention is directed to a system for verifying ausage of a transportation resource by an object user of thetransportation resource, the system comprising: a means for selecting apeer group of users that are expected to have similar behavior as theobject user; a means for identifying a set of behavioral attributes ofthe peer group; a means for determining a normal behavior of the peergroup regarding the identified set of behavioral attributes; and a meansfor comparing a behavior of the object user to the normal behaviorregarding the identified set of behavior attributes to verify the usageof the object user.

A third aspect of the invention is directed to a computer programproduct for verifying a usage of a transportation resource by an objectuser of the transportation resource, the computer program productcomprising: computer usable program code configured to: select a peergroup of users that are expected to have similar behavior as the objectuser; identify a set of behavioral attributes of the peer group;determine a normal behavior of the peer group regarding the identifiedset of behavioral attributes; and compare a behavior of the object userto the normal behavior regarding the identified set of behaviorattributes to verify the usage of the object user.

A fourth aspect of the invention is directed to a method of generating asystem for verifying a usage of a transportation resource by an objectuser of the transportation resource, the method comprising: providing acomputer infrastructure operable to: select a peer group of users thatare expected to have similar behavior as the object user; identify a setof behavioral attributes of the peer group; determine a normal behaviorof the peer group regarding the identified set of behavioral attributes;compare a behavior of the object user to the normal behavior regardingthe identified set of behavior attributes to verify the usage of theobject user; and communicate a result of the verification to a customerof the system.

Other aspects and features of the present invention, as defined solelyby the claims, will become apparent to those ordinarily skilled in theart upon review of the following non-limited detailed description of theinvention in conjunction with the accompanying figures.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

The embodiments of this invention will be described in detail, withreference to the following figures, wherein like designations denotelike elements, and wherein:

FIG. 1 shows a schematic view of an illustrative-transportation resourceusage charging system according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2 shows a block diagram of an illustrative computer systemaccording to one embodiment of the invention

FIG. 3 shows a flow diagram of one embodiment of a historic analysisoperation of a transportation resource usage verifying system accordingto the invention.

FIG. 4 shows a flow diagram of one embodiment of a prospective analysisoperation of the transportation resource usage verifying systemaccording to the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The following detailed description of embodiments refers to theaccompanying drawings, which illustrate specific embodiments of theinvention. Other embodiments having different structures and operationsdo not depart from the scope of the present invention.

1. System Overview

Referring to FIG. 1, a schematic view of an illustrative transportationresource usage charging system 10 is shown. According to one embodiment,charging system 10 includes a transportation resource usage processingcenter 12 including a computer system 100, a collecting and refund unit200 and an investigating unit 300; and multiple monitoring units 14 (twoare shown). Monitoring units 14 detect a behavior of a user 16 regardingthe usage of a transportation resource by collecting usage dataincluding, e.g., mileage, fuel consumption, routes taken, times of useand taxes paid. Monitoring units 14 may include any devices that canmonitor user 16 regarding the usage of a transportation resource, andmay be installed conveniently in, for example, road checkpoints, tollbooths, gas stations, or in the vehicle of user 16 monitored, such as,for example, a Global Positioning System (GPS) device.

User 16 communicates with processing center 12 regarding, for example,usage of the transportation resource, taxes paid, refunds and/oradditional charges to be collected. User 16 also communicates withmonitoring units 14 in the process of data collecting. For example, user16 pays fuel tax in gas stations and pays highway fees in toll booths.In charging system 10, an object user (16) is generally a user (16) of atransportation resource. However, for illustrative purposes only, in thefollowing description, a user (16) is referred as an object user (16)when this user's case is processed by processing center 12, e.g., whenthe usage of a transportation resource by this specific user is to beverified as described below. It should be noted that in charging system10, regardless of whether a user is an object user, its usage oftransportation resources is monitored because: (a) any user maypotentially become an object user, and (b) any user may be selected intoa peer group as described later. Details of computer system 100 ofprocessing center 12 will be described below.

2. Computer System

Referring to FIG. 2, a block diagram of an illustrative computer system100 according to the present invention is shown. In one embodiment,computer system 100 includes a memory 120, a processing unit (PU) 122,input/output devices (I/O) 124 and a bus 126. A database 128 may also beprovided for storage of data relative to processing tasks. Memory 120includes a program product 130 that, when executed by PU 122, comprisesvarious functional capabilities described in further detail below.Memory 120 (and database 128) may comprise any known type of datastorage system and/or transmission media, including magnetic media,optical media, random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), adata object, etc. Moreover, memory 120 (and database 128) may reside ata single physical location comprising one or more types of data storage,or be distributed across a plurality of physical systems. PU 122 maylikewise comprise a single processing unit, or a plurality of processingunits distributed across one or more locations. I/O 124 may comprise anyknown type of input/output device including a network system, modem,keyboard, mouse, scanner, voice recognition system, CRT, printer, discdrives, etc. Additional components, such as cache memory, communicationsystems, system software, etc., may also be incorporated into computersystem 100.

As shown in FIG. 2, program product 130 may include a transportationresource usage verifying system 132 that includes a data collector 140;a normal behavior determinator 142 including a sampler 144, a behavioralattribute identifier 145 and an analyzer 146; a usage verifier 148including a comparator 150 and a combiner 152; a prospective abnormalbehavior detector 154; and other system components 156. Other systemcomponents 156 may include any now known or later developed parts of acomputer system 100 not individually delineated herein, but understoodby those skilled in the art.

Inputs to computer system 100 include monitoring inputs 160, operatorinputs 162 and transportation resource (TR) user inputs 164. Monitoringinputs 160 include the data collected by monitoring units 14 (FIG. 1).Operator inputs 162 include instruction of an operator of computersystem 100 regarding the operation of, inter alia, transportationresource usage verifying system 132, as will be described in detailsbelow. Transportation resource user inputs 164 include usage data thatare reported by user/object user 16 (FIG. 1). Those inputs may becommunicated to computer system 100 through I/O 124 and may be stored indatabase 128. Outputs of computer system 100 include verifying resultoutputs 166 that are communicated to, inter alia, collecting and refundunit 200 and investigating unit 300 for them to act accordingly. Forexample, if a usage of object user 16 (FIG. 1) is verified as reliable,e.g., no fraud involved, collecting and refund unit 200 will process arefund or further collecting of fees according to the verified usage. Onthe other hand, if a usage of object user 16 is determined asunreliable, e.g., possible frauds involved, investigating unit 300 willproceed with further investigation regarding object user 16. Theoperation of transportation resource usage verifying system 132 will bedescribed in details below.

3. Transportation Resource Usage Verifying System

Transportation resource usage verifying system 132 functions generallyto verify whether an observed usage of a transportation resource that isto be used to process a usage charge represents the actual usage by anobject user 16 (FIG. 1). Please note a usage used to process a usagecharge is always an observed usage because the actual usage can never bereplicated. As such, in this description, “usage” is equivalent to“observed usage”, and “actual usage” is used to indicate the actualusage that has occurred. An observed usage may be obtained by monitoringan object user's usage through monitoring units 14 (FIG. 1), forexample, fuel tax payments monitored by monitoring units 14 in gasstations may be used to determine an observed usage. The observed usagemay also be obtained through the usage reported by object user 16. Itshould be understood that an observed usage (either monitored orreported) may not represent the actual usage due to, e.g., possiblefraudulent actions involved in the reporting and/or monitoring process.Even if there are no fraudulent actions involved, an observed usage maystill not represent the actual usage for various reasons. For example,in the case that fuel tax is used to calculate an observed usage, if auser purchases gas in the geographic area of concern but uses thevehicle in another area, the observed usage calculated based on fuel taxpaid will not represent the actual usage of the transportation resourcesin the geographic area of concern. One embodiment of the operation oftransportation resource usage verifying system 132 is shown in the flowdiagrams of FIGS. 3 and 4. In the following descriptions of the flowdiagrams of FIGS. 3 and 4, a road system (or roads) is used as anexample of transportation resources for illustrative purpose. It shouldbe understood that transportation resources are not limited to a roadsystem, and a verification of the usage of other transportationresources is similarly included in the scope of the present invention.

According to one embodiment, the processing of collecting and refund bycollecting and refund unit 200 (FIG. 1) regarding each object user 16 isperformed periodically. By the end of each processing period, usage ofroad by object user 16 during the period (past usage) will be firstverified by transportation resource usage verifying system 132 before itis processed by collecting and refund unit 200. The verification of pastusage that is to be processed to collect fees or issue refunds isreferred to as historic analysis, for illustrative purpose only. Itshould be noted that the historic analysis may also be used tocorrect/certify a collecting and refund action already performed bycollecting and refund unit 200. In addition, transportation resourceusage verifying system 132 also verifies a road usage of object user 16(FIG. 1) during a processing period to identify suspect behavior ofobject user 16. The verification of road usage during a processingperiod is referred to as prospective analysis, for illustrative purposeonly. An embodiment of the historical analysis operation oftransportation resource usage verifying system 132 will be shown in theflow diagram of FIG. 3, and an embodiment of the prospective analysisoperation of transportation resource usage verifying system 132 will beshown in the flow diagram of FIG. 4.

Referring now to FIG. 3, with reference also to FIG. 2, first in stepS201, data collector 140 collects and organizes data to facilitate afurther statistical analysis of the data. The data collected includethose of monitoring inputs 160 and transportation resource user inputs164. As described above, data collector 140 collects data of all users16 in a processing period. According to one embodiment, the datacollected may be categorized as including road usage data and usercharacteristic data. Road usage data may include the data regardingfactors that indicate usage of roads, such as mileage, fuel consumption,routes taken, times of use, taxes paid, etc. Generally, road usage dataare capable of being quantified, i.e., described as values. The factorsthat indicate road usage will be referred to as usage indicators, andthe data value regarding each usage indicator is referred to as a user'sbehavior regarding this specific usage indicator. It is understandablethat an observed usage of object user 16 is represented by the behaviorsof object user 16 regarding the usage indicators. A user's behavior mayalso refer to a relationship between and among the user's behaviorregarding each specific usage indicator. That is, the word “behavior”has two levels of meanings in this specification, i.e., in the level ofindividual usage indicator and in the level of the relationships betweenand among individual usage indicators.

For each specific user 16 (FIG. 1), the data for usage indicators mighthave some problems such as missing data or obviously strange data. Thoseproblems need to be resolved by data collector 140 in step S201 beforethe problematic data is used for further analysis. Road usage data mayalso need to be treated in step S201 to fit an analysis purpose. Forexample, in some situations, a categorized type of data might be moresuitable than a data of continuous value, so continuous road usage datamay need to be converted to categorized data in step S201.

User characteristics data include data regarding characteristics of auser (16) that affect the usage of road by the user (16). As isunderstandable, user characteristics are generally related to road usageindirectly, i.e., they do not directly indicate road usage, instead theyaffect road usage. For example, a taxi driver (user characteristic)tends to use road more frequently than an ordinary commute driver, andtends to have low gas/mileage efficiency because of frequent stops. Butbeing a taxi driver does not directly indicate the amount of road usage.In step S201, user characteristic data and road usage data (usageindicators) may be organized together in a table to facilitate furtheranalysis.

Next in step S202, normal behavior determinator 142 determines a normalbehavior that object user 16 (FIG. 1) is expected to behave inconsistent with. The normal behavior is determined by analyzing a peergroup of users having the same (or similar) user characteristics asobject user 16. Specifically, in step S202 a, sampler 144establishes/selects a peer group of users that have the same or similaruser characteristics as object user 16, who are thus generally expectedto behave similarly regarding road usage indicators as object user 16.Here the meaning of behaving similarly regarding road usage include, butis not limited to, similar behavior (i.e., value) regarding each usageindicator and similar relationships between and among usage indicators.For example, if object user 16 is a taxi driver, a group of other taxidrivers working in the similar region of the same city as object user 16might be selected to establish a peer group. For each taxi driver (roaduser) in this peer group, it is expected that the relationship betweenand among road usage indicators (e.g., correlation between fuelconsumption and mileage) should be similar. It is understandable thatsimilar behavior regarding each individual road usage indicator is adifferent standard than similar relationship between and among roadusage indicators. The selection of peer group may be dependent uponwhich standard is used. In the operation of transportation resourceusage verifying system 132, an operator of the system may instructverifying system 132 regarding which standard is used for a specifickind of object user 16, through operator input 162.

It should be noted that road usage indicators may also be used,independently or together with user characteristics data, to select peergroups. For example, a group of users 16 having similar behaviorsregarding some of the road usage indicators may be expected to havesimilar behaviors regarding other road usage indicators. In thefollowing description, however, selection of a peer group using usercharacteristics data is used as an illustrative example for descriptivepurpose only.

It should also be noted that the selection of a peer group is performedby verifying system 132, specifically sampler 144, independent of user16 interventions. No information regarding the peer group selection, forexample, standards, procedures, and/or results, will be communicated touser 16. This is to ensure that object user 16 and other users havingthe potential of being selected into a peer group will not coordinate ina fraudulent type of actions, which will be more difficult to detect.

According to one embodiment, in step S202 a, sampler 144 firstidentifies a pool of all the users that have the same (or similar) usercharacteristics as object user 16. Next, sampler 144 samples a peergroup from the pool. One reason for sampling a peer group from the poolis to save system resources of computer system 100 (FIG. 2), forexample, the memory space required for further calculation. It should beunderstood that in some situations, sampling may not be necessary or maynot be desirable. For example, if the pool itself is not big or if thepotential sampling errors are not acceptable, the pool of all the usershaving the same (or similar) user characteristics as object user 16 maybe used as the peer group. The sampling may utilize any now known orfuture developed methods of sampling, for example, random sampling orrepresentative sampling.

Next in step S202 b, behavioral attribute identifier 145 identifies aset of usage indicators, regarding which object user 16 is expected tobehave similarly as the peer group identified in step S202 a. Theidentified set of usage indicators is referred to as behavioralattributes, for illustrative purpose only. For a specific object user16, it may not be expected that he behaves similarly regarding all roadusage indicators, instead it is expected that object user 16 behavessimilarly regarding some usage indicators. For example, an object taxidriver (user) may be expected to behave similarly regarding gas mileageas his peer group, but may not be expected to take the similar routes asdetected by, e.g., a GPS device in the taxi car, as the peer group.Please note, behaving similarly includes similar behavior regarding eachbehavioral attribute or similar relationship between and among thebehavioral attributes.

According to one embodiment, the selection of behavioral attributes maybe based on statistical analysis of the behaviors of the selected peergroup regarding road usage indicators. For example, a standard deviationof the peer group behaviors regarding a specific road usage indicatormay be compared to a threshold, for example, standard deviation beingless than 5 percent of mean. If the standard deviation of the peer groupbehaviors regarding a specific road usage indicator meets the threshold,that specific road usage indicator may be selected as a behavioralattribute.

According to an alternative embodiment, the selection of behavioralattributes may be based on empirical data/past cases of fraud in roadusage charging. For example, past cases of fraud may show that for auser with a specific kind of user characteristic, frauds in road usagecharging generally involve strange behaviors regarding a certain roadusage indicators. The certain road usage indicators may be selected asthe behavioral attributes. It should be noted that any now known orlater developed methods of selecting behavior attributes are alsoincluded in the current invention. It should also be noted that thosemethods may used independently or in combination in selecting behaviorattributes.

Next in step S202 c, normal behavior determinator 142 determines anormal behavior of the peer group selected for object user 16 regardingthe set of behavioral attributes identified in step S202 b. Variousmethods may be used to determine the normal behavior. According to oneembodiment, if the identified behavioral attributes have some kinds ofcausal or non-causal relationship, a statistical description of therelationship, such as a correlation table or a regression equation maybe used to identify the normal behavior. For example, a mileage of avehicle of object user 16 may be related to fuel consumption, time ofuse (e.g., whether peak traffic time or not), route taken (e.g., highwayor not), and age of object user 16, etc. Using the data of the peergroup, a regression equation may be obtained as follows:Mileage=A*Fuel+B*Time+C*Route+D*age  (1)Regression equation (1) may be used to describe the normal behavior. Asdescribed above, object user 16 behaving similarly as the peer groupincludes similar relationship between and among the behaviors (datavalues) regarding each behavioral attribute as the peer group.Regression equation (1) represents such a similar relationship. That is,if the behaviors (data values) of object user 16 regarding behavioralattributes, e.g., mileage, fuel consumption, time of use, route taken,and age, conform to equation (1), object user 16 is considered behavingsimilarly as the peer group.

According to an alternative embodiment, especially when the identifiedbehavioral attributes do not have a reasonable relationship, thestatistical mean of the behaviors of the peer group regarding abehavioral attribute may be selected as the normal behavior regardingthis behavioral attribute. The statistical mean may be either average ormedian depending on the specific object user 16 and the peer group.According to one embodiment, an average is a better choice because astandard deviation is calculated based on the average, instead of themedian. As will be described below, a standard deviation will be used infurther analysis. It should be noted that any now existing and laterdeveloped methods of determining a normal behavior are included in thescope of the present invention.

Next in step S203, usage verifier 148 verifies an observed road usage ofobject user 16. Specifically, in step S203 a, comparator 150 comparesthe behavior of object user 16 with the normal behavior determined instep S202 regarding the identified set of behavioral attributes. Thespecific procedure of the comparison depends on how the normal behavioris determined in step S202 c. According to one embodiment, if the normalbehavior is determined using, e.g., regression equation (1), comparator150 incorporates the observed behaviors of object user 16 (FIG. 1)regarding the identified behavioral attributes, except for mileage, intoequation (1) to obtain a mileage value and compares this obtainedmileage value with the observed mileage of object user 16. If thedifference between the observed mileage and the obtained mileage iswithin a preset threshold, it is considered that the observed mileagerepresents the actual mileage and the observed usage represents theactual usage.

Similarly, comparator 150 may obtain an obtained value for each of theidentified behavioral attributes and compare the obtained value with theobserved value. A difference between the obtained value and the observedvalue of each behavioral attribute may be converted into a score between0 and 1000. Any now known and later developed score normalizationprocedures may be used in the conversion, and are included in thepresent invention. Because the details of the conversion are notnecessary for an understanding of the invention, further details willnot be provided.

According to an alternative embodiment, if the normal behavior isdetermined using the mean of the peer group behaviors regarding eachidentified behavioral attribute, comparator 150 compares the observedbehavior of object user 16 with the normal behavior with respect to eachof the identified set of behavioral attributes. The difference betweenthe observed behavior and the normal behavior with respect to eachbehavioral attribute may be converted into a 0 to 1000 score using thesame procedure described above. It should be noted that any now existingor later developed method of comparing an observed behavior with thenormal behavior are included in the current invention.

Next in step S203 b, combiner 152 combines the comparison results, i.e.,the scores, with respect to each behavioral attribute to generate anoverall comparison results, i.e., a combined score. The combined scoremay be compared to a threshold to determine whether the observed usagerepresents the actual usage of object user 16 (FIG. 1), i.e., to verifythe observed usage of object user 16. According to one embodiment, thescores with respect to the individual behavioral attributes are averagedto obtain a combined score. According to an alternative embodiment, thescore with respect to each behavioral attribute is first weighedaccording to the behavioral attribute's relative importance in verifyingroad usage before the score is combined with others to obtain a combinedscore.

If the combined score is larger than a pre-set threshold, i.e., notmeeting the threshold, the observed usage is considered not representingthe actual usage, and it is considered that a fraud is probably involvedin obtaining the observed usage. In this case, verifying system 132 willcommunicate the verifying result to investigating unit 300 throughverifying result outputs 166 (FIG. 2) for further investigation ofobject user 16. If the combined score is smaller than the presetthreshold, i.e., meeting the threshold, the observed usage is consideredrepresenting the actual usage. In this case, verifying system 132 willcommunicate the verifying result to collecting and refund unit 200through verifying result outputs 166, for collecting and refund unit 200to process fee collecting or refunding therein according to the observedusage.

Referring now to FIG. 4, which shows one embodiment of the prospectiveanalysis operation of transportation resources usage verifying system132. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 4, the steps S301 to S302 are thesame as the steps S201 to S202 of the historic analysis operation shownin FIG. 3. As described above, a prospective analysis is performedduring a processing period of processing center 12, when computer system100 does not have all the data required to determine a normal behavior(steps S202). As such, the data used in steps S301 to S302 are thosecollected in a proceeding processing period. As a consequence, for aspecific object user 16, steps S301 to S302 are the same as steps S201to S202 of a historic analysis operation of the preceding processingperiod and might be skipped. Because the data used in steps S301 to S302are those from the preceding processing period, the normal behaviordetermined (obtained) in step S302 is referred to as past normalbehavior, for illustrative purpose only.

Next in step S303, prospective abnormal behavior detector 154 detects anabnormal behavior of object user 16 before an observed usage of objectuser 16 is to be processed by processing center 12 and verified byverifying system 132 in a historic analysis operation. Specifically, instep S303 a, perspective abnormal behavior detector 154 compares abehavior of object user 16 detected by monitoring units 14 (FIG. 1) withthe past normal behavior of the peer group using the same procedures asstep S203 as described above. Please note, in a prospective analysis,observed behaviors of object user 16 are usually those detected bymonitoring units 14 because object user 16 may not report usage during aprocessing period. However, a prospective analysis using a reportedbehavior of object user 16 is similarly included in the presentinvention.

Next in step S303 b, prospective abnormal behavior detector 154 comparesa behavior of object user 16 detected by monitoring units 14 (FIG. 1)with the past observed behavior of object user 16 itself. The pastobserved behavior may be obtained using the behavior of object user 16in the immediate preceding processing period, or may be obtaining usingan average of the behaviors of object user 16 in a serial of precedingprocessing periods. If, in either step S303 a or S303 b or both, thecomparison result does not meet a preset threshold, the detectedbehavior of object user 16 is considered abnormal. In this case,verifying system 132 will communicate the result to investigating unit300 through verifying result output(s) 166 to further investigate objectuser 16. If, in both steps S303 a and S303 b, the comparison resultsmeet the preset threshold, the detected behavior of object user 16 isconsidered normal. In this case, no further action will be taken.

4. Conclusion

While shown and described herein as a method and system for verifying ausage of a transportation resource, it is understood that the inventionfurther provides various alternative embodiments. For example, in oneembodiment, the invention provides a program product stored on acomputer-readable medium, which when executed, enables a computerinfrastructure to verify a usage of a transportation resource. To thisextent, the computer-readable medium includes program code, such ascomputer system 100 (FIG. 2), which implements the process describedherein. It is understood that the term “computer-readable medium”comprises one or more of any type of physical embodiment of the programcode. In particular, the computer-readable medium can comprise programcode embodied on one or more portable storage articles of manufacture(e.g., a compact disc, a magnetic disk, a tape, etc.), on one or moredata storage portions of a computing device, such as memory 120 (FIG. 2)and/or database 128 (FIG. 2), and/or as a data signal traveling over anetwork (e.g., during a wired/wireless electronic distribution of theprogram product).

In another embodiment, the invention provides a method of generating asystem for verifying a usage of a transportation resource. In this case,a computer infrastructure, such as computer system 100 (FIG. 2), can beobtained (e.g., created, maintained, having made available to, etc.) andone or more systems for performing the process described herein can beobtained (e.g., created, purchased, used, modified, etc.) and deployedto the computer infrastructure. To this extent, the deployment of eachsystem can comprise one or more of: (1) installing program code on acomputing device, such as computing system 100 (FIG. 2), from acomputer-readable medium; (2) adding one or more computing devices tothe computer infrastructure; and (3) incorporating and/or modifying oneor more existing systems of the computer infrastructure, to enable thecomputer infrastructure to perform the process steps of the invention.

In still another embodiment, the invention provides a business methodthat performs the process described herein on a subscription,advertising supported, and/or fee basis. That is, a service providercould offer to verify a usage of a transportation resource as describedherein. In this case, the service provider can manage (e.g., create,maintain, support, etc.) a computer infrastructure, such as computersystem 100 (FIG. 2), that performs the process described herein for oneor more customers and communicates the results to the one or morecustomers. In return, the service provider can receive payment from thecustomer(s) under a subscription and/or fee agreement and/or the serviceprovider can receive payment from the sale of advertising to one or morethird parties.

As used herein, it is understood that the terms “program code” and“computer program code” are synonymous and mean any expression, in anylanguage, code or notation, of a set of instructions that cause acomputing device having an information processing capability to performa particular function either directly or after any combination of thefollowing: (a) conversion to another language, code or notation; (b)reproduction in a different material form; and/or (c) decompression. Tothis extent, program code can be embodied as one or more types ofprogram products, such as an application/software program, componentsoftware/a library of functions, an operating system, a basic I/Osystem/driver for a particular computing and/or I/O device, and thelike. Further, it is understood that the terms “component” and “system”are synonymous as used herein and represent any combination of hardwareand/or software capable of performing some function(s).

The flowcharts and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblocks may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems which perform the specified functions or acts, or combinationsof special purpose hardware and computer instructions.

The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particularembodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. Asused herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended toinclude the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicatesotherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises”and/or “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify thepresence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements,and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of oneor more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements,components, and/or groups thereof.

Although specific embodiments have been illustrated and describedherein, those of ordinary skill in the art appreciate that anyarrangement which is calculated to achieve the same purpose may besubstituted for the specific embodiments shown and that the inventionhas other applications in other environments. This application isintended to cover any adaptations or variations of the presentinvention. The following claims are in no way intended to limit thescope of the invention to the specific embodiments described herein.

1. A method for verifying a usage of a transportation resource by anobject user of the transportation resource, the method comprising stepsof: selecting a peer group of users that are expected to have similarbehavior as the object user; identifying a set of behavioral attributesof the peer group; determining a normal behavior of the peer groupregarding the identified set of behavioral attributes; and comparing abehavior of the object user to the normal behavior regarding theidentified set of behavior attributes to verify the usage of the objectuser.
 2. The method of claim 1, further including a step of detecting abehavior of the object user.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein thebehavior of the object user is determined based on at least one of abehavior reported by the object user and a detected behavior.
 4. Themethod of claim 2, further comprising a step of detecting an abnormalbehavior of the object user before a usage of the object user is to beverified by comparing a detected behavior of the object user with thenormal behavior of the peer group.
 5. The method of claim 4, wherein theabnormal behavior detecting step further includes comparing the detectedbehavior of the object user with a past behavior of the object user. 6.The method of claim 1, wherein the normal behavior determining stepincludes collecting behaviors of the peer group of users and analyzingthe collected behaviors of the peer group of users regarding theidentified set of behavioral attributes.
 7. The method of claim 1,wherein the comparing step include steps of: comparing the behavior ofthe object user with the normal behavior with respect to each of theidentified set of behavioral attributes; and combining a result of thecomparison with respect to each of the identified set of behavioralattributes to generate an overall comparison result.
 8. A system forverifying a usage of a transportation resource by an object user of thetransportation resource, the system comprising: a means for selecting apeer group of users that are expected to have similar behavior as theobject user; a means for identifying a set of behavioral attributes ofthe peer group; a means for determining a normal behavior of the peergroup regarding the identified set of behavioral attributes; and a meansfor comparing a behavior of the object user to the normal behaviorregarding the identified set of behavior attributes to verify the usageof the object user.
 9. The system of claim 1, further including a meansfor detecting a behavior of the object user.
 10. The system of claim 9,further comprising a means for detecting an abnormal behavior of theobject user before a usage of the object user is to be verified bycomparing a detected behavior of the object user with the normalbehavior of the peer group.
 11. The system of claim 10, wherein theabnormal behavior detecting further includes comparing the detectedbehavior of the object user with a past behavior of the object user. 12.The system of claim 8, wherein the normal behavior determining includescollecting behaviors of the peer group of users and analyzing thecollected behaviors of the peer group of users regarding the identifiedset of behavioral attributes.
 13. The system of claim 8, wherein thecomparing means is further configured to: compare the behavior of theobject user with the normal behavior with respect to each of theidentified set of behavioral attributes; and combine a result of thecomparison with respect to each of the identified set of behavioralattributes to generate an overall comparison result.
 14. A computerprogram product for verifying a usage of a transportation resource by anobject user of the transportation resource, the computer program productcomprising: computer usable program code configured to: select a peergroup of users that are expected to have similar behavior as the objectuser; identify a set of behavioral attributes of the peer group;determine a normal behavior of the peer group regarding the identifiedset of behavioral attributes; and compare a behavior of the object userto the normal behavior regarding the identified set of behaviorattributes to verify the usage of the object user.
 15. The programproduct of claim 14, wherein the computer usable program code is furtherconfigured to obtain a detected behavior of the object user.
 16. Theprogram product of claim 15, wherein the computer usable program code isfurther configured to detect an abnormal behavior of the object userbefore a usage of the object user is to be verified by comparing adetected behavior of the object user with the normal behavior of thepeer group.
 17. The program product of claim 16, wherein the computerusable program code is further configured to compare the detectedbehavior of the object user with a past behavior of the object user todetect an abnormal behavior of the object user.
 18. The program productof claim 14, wherein the normal behavior determining includes collectingdata of behaviors of the peer group of users and analyzing the collectedbehavior data of the peer group of users regarding the identified set ofbehavioral attributes.
 19. The program product of claim 14, wherein thecomputer usable program code is further configured to: compare thebehavior of the object user with the normal behavior with respect toeach of the identified set of behavioral attributes; and combine aresult of the comparison with respect to each of the identified set ofbehavioral attributes to generate an overall comparison result.
 20. Amethod of generating a system for verifying a usage of a transportationresource by an object user of the transportation resource, the methodcomprising: providing a computer infrastructure operable to: select apeer group of users that are expected to have similar behavior as theobject user; identify a set of behavioral attributes of the peer group;determine a normal behavior of the peer group regarding the identifiedset of behavioral attributes; compare a behavior of the object user tothe normal behavior regarding the identified set of behavior attributesto verify the usage of the object user; and communicate a result of theverification to a customer of the system.